Labor leads government in new poll

Voters have categorically rejected Prime Minister Tony Abbott's increase to the pension age of 70. A fresh poll shows two-thirds of voters oppose the plan.

Before a tough budget expected to include cuts to family payments and a rise in petrol excise, an exclusive Fairfax ReachTel poll has found strong opposition to extending the pension age. The backlash has led to the combined Liberal and Nationals vote dropping to 38 per cent before preferences compared to the ALP, which is on 40 per cent. That is a fall on the Coalition primary vote of 8 percentage points after it secured 46 per cent of first preference votes at the September 2013 election.

The Greens party remains around its election mark of 11 per cent, leading to a two-party-preferred result between Labor and the Coalition, based on preference flows at last year's election, of 54-46 in favour of the ALP - virtually reversing the election result.

But the poll also shows the government has won support for its controversial deficit tax plan. More than half of all voters think a hit on high income earners is justified to rebalance the budget.

Advertisement

The survey follows a series of polls in recent weeks charting the government's fast-waning popularity as it manages a difficult pre-budget period.

A stream of reports have signalled tax increases, a new user-pays focus for services, which means such things as GP visits will

Photo: Fairfax Graphics

attract up-front payments, and changes to virtually every level of federal government activity.

Asked ''would you support a deficit levy of between 1 and 2 per cent being imposed on high income earners to help reduce debt'', 54 per cent of respondents indicated support.

This compared to 32 per cent opposed, and 14 per cent undecided.

The deficit tax would add an extra 2¢ on top of the top marginal bracket of 45¢ in every dollar earned above $180,000 in order to raise between $4.8 billion and $5.2 billion over four years, according to experts.

Coalition supporters appear most relaxed about the measure despite this cohort being most likely to be hit.

Sixty-three per cent of Coalition voters back the tax plan and less than a quarter oppose it. Support is lowest among Labor voters but highest overall among voters of all loyalties aged above 65 years where it finds favour with 69 per cent.

The surprise finding may ultimately vindicate Mr Abbott's politically risky decision to break a solemn and repeated election pledge of no new or increased taxes.

With his government already bleeding supporters and trailing Labor, the ReachTel poll of 3241 respondents suggests that trend could become even more pronounced once the delayed pension age becomes official.

Taken on Thursday night, the survey showed two-thirds of voters - or 68 per cent - opposed lifting the retirement age to 70, notwithstanding that it is already moving in increments from the present age of 65 to 67 by 2023. The government's plan will see that incremental advance continued until 2035 when a retiree would need to be 70 to obtain the pension.

In recent days, government ministers from Treasurer Joe Hockey down have been warning of across-the-board pain in the budget. Some suggest the controversial debt levy, which seemed unthinkable only a fortnight ago, would be among the least objectionable aspects of the budget.

The ReachTel poll showed that in every age bracket and in the three established voter groups – the Coalition, ALP, and the Greens – a firm majority remained opposed to the 70-year-old eligibility.

The most marked difference was among Greens supporters who opposed the plan decisively with 82 per cent against to just 7 per cent in favour. Eleven per cent were undecided. Among Labor voters, 82 per cent opposed the older age compared with 10 per cent in favour.

Coalition supporters were more evenly split with 46 per cent opposed to and 40 per cent for the change.

150 comments

Given that Gen X is leading the Baby Boomers in obesity, we will probably be dropping off the perch at a younger age and the increase to age 70 for anyone b. 1966 onwards is unnecessary. In terms of economic generational warfare the BBs have come out on top... free uni education, pensions, affordable housing.

Commenter

Mr Coot

Location

Perth, WA

Date and time

May 10, 2014, 11:06AM

No new taxes. No increase in taxes.

Lies, lies and more lies ! ELECTION NOW !

Commenter

Get Real

Date and time

May 10, 2014, 11:21AM

Yes Mr Coot and it feels like Gen X is constantly being asked to pay for the privileges the baby boomers enjoy. So, now I am in $40 000 debt for my uni fees, I can't save the deposit for a house or unit in Perth, first homebuyers schemes are slashed, and now I am told my retirement age is now 70. Meanwhile the baby boomers sit on three houses, get the aged pension, never paid a cent for their university education. My manual labouring mates & tradies are already clapping out with dodgy knees and backs, arthritis and other bodily wear & tear but the Liberals wouldn't ever know about those issues. Let's all smoke cigars.

Commenter

Peter

Date and time

May 10, 2014, 11:28AM

@Peter. People who generalise like that really give me the S#$%s.

I'm a baby boomer. I have one house, mainly because I don't believe that residential housing as an investment is in the nation's interest. Yes, I own my house, but only because my late father aws as prudent as I am. I paid into superannuation all my working life so I am self-funded in retirement. I don't get the pension. I may qualify for a small part pension in my late 80's but with my three chronic ilnesses it is unlikely I will live that long. My wife and I live a lifestyle I characterise as on the modest side of comfortable on a combined superannuation income of about $60,000. (Our money, no-one else's).And now this bastard government wants to tax our superannuation which has already been taxed twice, and take away our health cards. A quick calculation says that as a reward for providing for our own retirement we will be about $16,000 a year worse off.

Commenter

Paul D

Location

Brissie

Date and time

May 10, 2014, 11:58AM

70 as a qualifying pension age is simply unrealistic & quite absurd, and the argument that it's ok, because labor changed the age from 65 to 67 even more so. By that logic we can next expect to hear its going up to 73 and that that's not a big deal because, well, it's not a big stretch from 70! It seems anything, apart from fixing the inequities in superannuation taxation and Howard's crazy free passes for the wealthy as well as other untouchables, such as the poor suffering mining companies, is on and excusable. What's that Lassey? Tony's stuck in the well and his front bench have fallen in on top of him? Good, leave the lying hypocrites in there to rot!

Commenter

Warwick

Date and time

May 10, 2014, 12:24PM

hold on kids for the ride.I hate to say it but palmer is looking more and more like our only hope of not letting this party of blatant liers and extremist policies ruining the country forever. It really does make you wonder whether we could be all witnessing the buildup to the dismissal sequel.

Memo to Bill.... mate stop using the reference to 'australian families' all the time. not only is that line outdated its making a lot of people sick. also remember that not everybody is in a so called family so you are continually ostracising a lot of people. post-tuesday I expect to see some polished lines with a bit of wit thrown in and not the tired old lines. fire up, or sit back and put albanese up front if you dont think you are up to it.

Commenter

harry

Location

melbourne

Date and time

May 10, 2014, 12:26PM

As a 54 year old I find it amusing that those affected by the pension come out screaming the loudest. Reality bite....you are the same group that fought Gillard the hardest and are primarily responsible, as a voting block, for the LNP being in power. Well enjoy the ride because it won't get better. The LNP's policies are for big business and the wealthy as this coming budget will show. Why no means test on EVERYTHING for those on 2 x average incomes ($120k/yr). Why no mining tax, why a diesel rebate for miners, why a 50% rebate on capitals gains tax. Why can large companies get away with paying a pittance on profits in the billions? Why no moral opposition from you on the billions to be spent on the LNP's idea of Carbon abatement (money that could be allocated to the genuinely poor pensioners and needy).People tend to forget that the the economies with the highest standard of living, best health, best education, and lowest crime rates are Norway, Sweden, Denmark and associated countries. They have a population that has recognised that to enjoy a higher standard of living and better life we all need to contribute more of our income to enjoy these benefits. However, we are heading for the lifestyle of those in the USA, lower taxes and a lower standard of living and all the ills associated with it.......its the LNP's grand plan....

Commenter

JIM

Location

Bayside

Date and time

May 10, 2014, 12:32PM

So peter, it's the Boomers fault again? The same boomers who didn't get a FHO grant of any sort and were paying 18% interest on their mortgages during the 80's. But then they were able to save for a deposit by not going out and buying expensive other stuff. They probably bought a dog box out in the sticks and had one car that they held on to for ten+ years to pay for the kids to go to school as they didn't get the massive taxpayer handouts of today (meagre child endowment vs. FTPA+B, schoolkids bonus etc. etc.).

Commenter

David

Location

OutEast

Date and time

May 10, 2014, 12:59PM

Well, Peter, grow up and stop dumping onto the Baby Boomer generation because they seem like an easy target to you. Perhaps you should have thought more wisely before you voted LNP.

Commenter

Jarrod Bilton

Date and time

May 10, 2014, 1:20PM

Jim, great comment.I feel a DD coming on. I increasingly think the senate will be our saviour from these nation destroying, cigar smoking, class warfare zealots. The tougher the budget the more chance we have of blocked supply. Bring it on.